`MarmotOutboundDao.addMembersToChatRoom` stages every member with `proposeAdd` and issues a single `commit()`. Both callers that know their membership up front now use it: `SelectChatRoomTypeViewModel.inviteMembers` at room creation, and `DkgRitualViewModel.inviteAdmins` for the #admins room. Inviting one at a time created an epoch per member, and each of those commits raced the previous member's welcome. MarmotInboundManager refuses future-epoch messages outright, on both wire formats, with no queue and no replay -- so the member who lost that race was silently stuck an epoch behind while the caller saw a successful invite. Deriving isOneMemberInitialGroupCreation narrowed that window; this removes it. No member ever has to process a commit for an epoch they were not yet in, so there is no longer a race to lose. One commit yields one welcome: `buildWelcome` emits an EncryptedGroupSecrets per added member and each joiner finds its own entry by key package reference. The blob is shared, delivery stays per peer, because each welcome event is tagged with that peer's key package. ## Why this needed no schema change Batching at creation time means the single commit happens while the group is still only its creator, which takes the immediate-welcome branch: nothing is broadcast and MarmotCommitResult is never written. The bookkeeping that assumes one peer per commit is simply not on this path. So the batch is taken only when `members().size == 1`, and anything else falls back to inviting sequentially -- correct, if not ideal. Batching into an established group would take the deferred branch, where `peerKeyPackageEventId` is singular and the ack-triggered delivery in DatabaseNostrRepository expects one welcome; making that work needs a list there and a fan-out on acknowledgement. Nothing currently adds several members to an established group, so that is left outstanding and documented rather than speculatively built. The group state is persisted after `commit()` and before any welcome goes out, so a crash between them leaves the group at the epoch the welcomes describe rather than one behind it. ## Reporting Members with no published key package still cannot be added -- a Marmot invite needs one -- and are now returned alongside any that failed to receive their welcome, rather than the two being conflated. Both still only reach the log; the coordinator is not yet told. docs/marmot-membership.md is updated in the same change: batching moves from outstanding work to described behaviour, with the schema constraint that shapes it and the remaining fan-out work recorded. The note about sequential invites is narrowed to where they still happen. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
149 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
149 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
# Adding members to a Marmot group
|
||
|
||
How members join an MLS group in this app, why the current shape has a silent
|
||
failure mode, and what to do about it.
|
||
|
||
This is the part of Marmot most likely to waste a day: everything compiles, the
|
||
invite reports success, and a member simply never appears. The reason is never in
|
||
the invite code.
|
||
|
||
## The two paths through `inviteMember`
|
||
|
||
`MarmotOutboundDao.inviteMember` branches on `isOneMemberInitialGroupCreation`:
|
||
|
||
**`true` — the group is only its creator.**
|
||
The Welcome goes out immediately via `deliveryWelcome`, which builds it and
|
||
inserts a `GiftWrapPayload`. No commit event is broadcast and no
|
||
`MarmotCommitResult` is stored. Correct, because there is nobody else in the group
|
||
who needs to learn anything.
|
||
|
||
**`false` — the group already has members.**
|
||
A commit event (kind 445, ephemeral signer, h-tagged with `nostrGroupId`) is
|
||
broadcast so existing members advance their epoch. The Welcome is *not* sent.
|
||
Instead `commitResult.welcomeBytes` is stored on a `MarmotCommitResult`, and
|
||
`DatabaseNostrRepository` picks it back up when the relay acknowledges the commit
|
||
and only then calls `deliveryWelcome`.
|
||
|
||
The deferral is deliberate: the invitee must not join an epoch the existing
|
||
members have not reached yet.
|
||
|
||
## Which branch is taken, and why nobody chooses it
|
||
|
||
`inviteMember` derives it:
|
||
|
||
```kotlin
|
||
val isOneMemberInitialGroupCreation = mlsGroup.members().size == 1
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Read before `addMember` advances the tree, and `members()` skips empty leaves so it
|
||
stays right for a group that has had members removed.
|
||
|
||
No caller passes it, deliberately. None of them is in a better position to know,
|
||
and both that tried got it wrong: `inviteMemberToChatRoom` hardcoded `false`, so
|
||
**every group's first invite took the deferred path** even though the group was
|
||
still just its creator. That was wrong twice over — the commit had no audience,
|
||
and the Welcome was then gated on a relay acknowledging it. With
|
||
`Relays.DefaultDMRelayList` down to a single relay, that meant the first invitee
|
||
of every group depended on one ack for an event nobody needed.
|
||
|
||
## Why this fails silently
|
||
|
||
`MarmotInboundManager` refuses anything from a future epoch outright, on both
|
||
wire formats:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
PrivateMessage epoch N is ahead of local epoch M; ignoring
|
||
Commit epoch N is ahead of local epoch M; ignoring
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
There is no queue and no replay for either. A commit that arrives before its
|
||
recipient's Welcome is **dropped, not deferred**, and that member never advances.
|
||
`EPOCH_RETENTION_WINDOW` (5) retains *past* epochs so late messages can still be
|
||
decrypted; it does nothing for messages from ahead.
|
||
|
||
Under the old hardcoded `false`, inviting two admins back to back went:
|
||
|
||
1. invite admin 1 → commit 1 broadcast immediately, Welcome 1 waits for ack 1
|
||
2. invite admin 2 → commit 2 broadcast immediately, Welcome 2 waits for ack 2
|
||
|
||
Both commits were on the wire before either Welcome. If commit 2 reached admin 1
|
||
before Welcome 1 did — different transports, no ordering guarantee, one a gift
|
||
wrap and the other a kind:445 — admin 1 dropped it and was stuck an epoch behind,
|
||
while the coordinator saw two successful invites.
|
||
|
||
Deriving the flag narrowed this, but did not close it: for n ≥ 3 the window
|
||
between Welcome 1 and commit 2 remained.
|
||
|
||
**Batching closes it.** When the membership is known up front, every member goes
|
||
into one commit, so no member ever has to process a commit for an epoch they were
|
||
not yet in — the race has nothing left to lose. See below.
|
||
|
||
## The condition holds at any group size
|
||
|
||
"The group has nobody to inform" is true exactly once, on the first invite, whether
|
||
the group ends up with 2 members or 30:
|
||
|
||
| invite | `members().size` | branch | correct because |
|
||
|---------|------------------|------------------------------|---------------------------|
|
||
| admin 1 | 1 | immediate Welcome, no commit | nobody to inform |
|
||
| admin 2 | 2 | commit + deferred Welcome | admin 1 must advance |
|
||
| admin 3 | 3 | commit + deferred Welcome | admins 1–2 must advance |
|
||
|
||
Commit 2 is encrypted with `commitResult.preCommitExporterSecret` — the epoch-1
|
||
secret, which admin 1 received in their Welcome — so they can decrypt it and
|
||
advance.
|
||
|
||
## Batching every add into one commit
|
||
|
||
`MarmotOutboundDao.addMembersToChatRoom` stages every member with `proposeAdd` and
|
||
issues a single `commit()`. `MlsGroup.addMember` is just those two in one call, and
|
||
`pendingProposals` is a list, so nothing in MLS objected.
|
||
|
||
One commit produces **one** Welcome: `buildWelcome` emits an `EncryptedGroupSecrets`
|
||
per added member, and each joiner finds its own entry by key package reference. The
|
||
blob is shared; delivery is still per peer, because each Welcome event is tagged
|
||
with that peer's key package.
|
||
|
||
Both callers that know their membership up front now use it —
|
||
`SelectChatRoomTypeViewModel.inviteMembers` at room creation, and
|
||
`DkgRitualViewModel.inviteAdmins` for the `#admins` room.
|
||
|
||
### Why this needed no schema change
|
||
|
||
Batching at creation time means the single commit happens while the group is still
|
||
only its creator. That takes the immediate-Welcome branch: no commit is broadcast,
|
||
and `MarmotCommitResult` is never written. The bookkeeping that assumes one peer per
|
||
commit is simply not on the path.
|
||
|
||
So `addMembersToChatRoom` batches **only** when `members().size == 1`, and falls
|
||
back to inviting sequentially otherwise. Batching into a group that already has
|
||
members would take the deferred branch, where `MarmotCommitResult.peerKeyPackageEventId`
|
||
is singular and `DatabaseNostrRepository`'s ack-triggered delivery expects one
|
||
Welcome. Making that work means holding a list of peers there and fanning out on
|
||
acknowledgement — still outstanding, and only needed for adding several members to
|
||
an established group, which nothing currently does.
|
||
|
||
### Ordering within the batch
|
||
|
||
The group state is persisted after `commit()` and before any Welcome is delivered,
|
||
so a crash between the two leaves the group at the epoch the Welcomes describe
|
||
rather than one behind it.
|
||
|
||
## Other things that bite
|
||
|
||
**Sequential invites each advance the epoch.** Where they still happen — the
|
||
fallback in `addMembersToChatRoom` for a group that already has members, and any
|
||
direct `inviteMember` call — the room must be re-read from the database between
|
||
them. A snapshot taken before the previous invite builds its commit on state the
|
||
group has already left, and the symptom is a conflicting commit rather than an
|
||
error.
|
||
|
||
**A member with no published key package cannot be added.** A Marmot invite needs
|
||
the invitee's `MarmotKeyPackage`. Both call sites look it up with a timeout and
|
||
collect the ones that failed. Today that only reaches the log — the
|
||
`TODO: Update status of participant Invitation.PENDING -> Invitation.SENT` at the
|
||
Welcome delivery site is the same gap seen from the other end.
|
||
|
||
**`deliveryWelcome` uses `Relays.DefaultDMRelayList`, not the room's relays.**
|
||
There is a `TODO: Get localChatRoom relays...` on the ack-triggered call site.
|